A. In the event of misunderstanding of facts under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant merely contacted the victim’s chest regardless of his/her will, and did not have the Defendant intentionally committed indecent act by compulsion.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of three million won and the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court also asserted that the Defendant had the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, determined that the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the intention of indecent act on the grounds of the circumstances indicated in its reasoning.

In full view of the following facts: (a) the judgment of the court below is justifiable; and (b) the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the defendant, as it does not appear that there is any error of law as otherwise alleged by the defendant, and thus, there is no ground to find this part of the judgment of the court below.

B. The Defendant is the primary offender of the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the fact that the Defendant agreed with the victim is favorable to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following facts: (a) the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant’s indecent act by compulsion of the victim boarding and driving the taxi; (b) the risk of the accident was considerably poor; (c) the victim received a considerable sexual humiliation and mental impulse to the extent that he could not operate the taxi during the course of running the taxi; and (d) other reasons for sentencing indicated in the arguments and records, the sentence of the lower court is sufficient to include various reasons for sentencing claimed by the Defendant.